Reducing Work-Life Conflict: What Works? What Doesn't?

1.3 Why Do We Need a Study Like This One?

Our data suggest that a substantive proportion of the Canadian workforce is having difficulty balancing work and family demands. The numbers from our research can be used to create a compelling case for action.⁸

Why do we need to reduce the number of Canadians reporting high levels of role overload?

Approximately 60% of Canadian employees report high levels of role overload. The consequences of high role overload, as identified in this study, are staggering. Compared to their counterparts with low levels of role overload, employees with high role overload are:

• 13 times more likely to be thinking of leaving their current employer because their work expectations are unrealistic
• 12 times more likely to report high levels of burnout
• 6 times more likely to report high levels of job stress
• 5 times more likely to be thinking of leaving their current employer because they want more time for their family and/or themselves
• 4 times more likely to say they are thinking of leaving their current employer because they are frustrated with their work environment and because their work environment is non-supportive
• 4 times more likely to have high levels of absenteeism due to physical, mental or emotional fatigue and to report high levels of perceived stress
• 3 times more likely to report high levels of depressed mood, have sought care from a mental health professional, and say that they are in poor physical health
• 3 times more likely to say they are thinking of leaving their current employer because their values are not the same as those of their organization
• twice as likely to have received medical care on an outpatient basis, to have made 6 or more visits per year to a physician, to have made 8 or more visits per year to another health care professional, to have required inpatient hospital care, and to have spent more than $300 per year on prescription medicine for personal use
• twice as likely to report high intent to turnover
• twice as likely to miss work due to child care problems and to miss three or more days of work in a 6-month period due to ill health
• half as likely to report that their family is well adapted
• half as likely to report high levels of job satisfaction, to have a positive view of their employer, and to report high levels of life satisfaction

The financial costs of high levels of role overload are also staggering. We estimate:

• the direct costs of absenteeism due to high role overload to be approximately $3 billion per year. Direct and indirect costs of absenteeism due to role overload are estimated to be between $4.5 (conservative estimate) and $6 billion per year.
• the direct cost of physician visits due to high role overload to be approximately $1.8 billion per year
• the direct cost of inpatient hospital stays due to high role overload to be approximately $4 billion per year
• the direct cost of visits to the hospital emergency department due to high role overload to be approximately one quarter of a billion dollars per year

In other words, a better understanding of how to reduce role overload should assist the Canadian government in reducing the demands on Canada's health care system and help Canadian organizations become more productive. It should also result in improved levels of family functioning (often linked to things like crime rates and family violence) and Canadians who are healthier, both physically and mentally.

Why do we need to reduce the number of Canadians reporting high work-to-family interference?

A similar case can be made for addressing the high levels of work-to-family interference reported by just over one in four (28%) in our sample. Compared to their counterparts with low work-to-family interference, employees with high work-to-family interference were:

• 7 times more likely to say they are thinking of leaving their current organization because they want more time for their family and/or themselves, and because their work expectations are unrealistic
• 6 times more likely to report high levels of job stress and high levels of burnout
• 4 times more likely to say they are thinking of leaving their current organization because their work environment is non-supportive, and because their values are not the same as those of their organization
• 3 times more likely to report high intent to turnover
• twice as likely to report high levels of depressed mood, high levels of perceived stress and to report that they are in poor physical health
• twice as likely to have missed work due to physical, emotional or mental fatigue, to have sought care from a mental health professional, to have received care on an outpatient basis, to have made 6 or more visits per year to a physician, to have required inpatient hospital care, to have visited a hospital emergency room, and to have spent more than $300 in the past year on prescription medicine for personal use
• one-third as likely to frequently engage in activities associated with high levels of family integration
• one-third as likely to report high levels of job satisfaction
• half as likely to live in families with high levels of adaptation
• half as likely to report high levels of family satisfaction, parental satisfaction and life satisfaction
• half as likely to have a positive view of their organization as a place to work and to report high levels of organizational commitment

The financial cost of high levels of work-to-family interference are also considerable. We estimate:

• the direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of work-to-family interference to be $1 billion per year in direct costs alone (costs increase to $1.5 to $2 billion if one also includes the indirect costs of this absenteeism)
• that the direct costs to the health care system of treating disorders associated with high levels of work-to-family interference to be approximately $2.8 billion per year (two thirds of a billion dollars per year in physician visits, $2 billion per year in inpatient hospital stays and just over $100 million per year in visits to hospital emergency department)

In other words, Canadian employers that use the findings from this study to reduce the number of employees in their organizations who are experiencing high work-to-family interference should have fewer problems recruiting and retaining employees (a large competitive advantage in today's tight labour market) and lower benefits costs. Similarly, governments that are concerned with ballooning health care costs and long wait times should be able to apply the findings from this study to these issues. Finally, Canadian families should also benefit from anticipated improvements in the physical and mental health of their members.

Why do we need to reduce the number of Canadians reporting high family-to-work interference?

While family-to-work interference is not common in Canada at this time (only 10% of the Canadians in our sample reported high levels of family-to-work interference), Canadian employers and governments need to determine ways to reduce this type of interference as demographic projections suggest that it will increase as the Canadian population ages. Why else should key stakeholders seek ways to reduce family-to-work interference? From our data we can offer the following motivations. Compared to their counterparts with low family-to-work interference, employees with high levels of this form of interference were:

• 7 times more likely to miss 3 or more days of work in a 6-month period due to child care problems
• 3 times more likely to have been absent from work (all causes combined)
• twice as likely to say their health is fair/poor, to report high levels of perceived stress, to report high levels of burnout, to report high levels of depressed mood, to have missed 3 or more days of work in the past 6 months (all causes combined), to have missed work due to physical, emotional or mental fatigue, to have missed 3 or more days of work in the past 6 months due to physical health problems, and to have sought care from mental health professionals
• half as likely to report high levels of family adaptation, high parental satisfaction, high family satisfaction, high life satisfaction and high job satisfaction

The financial costs of this form of work-life conflict, while not as overwhelming as those associated with overload and work-to-family interference, are still substantial. We estimate:

• the direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of family-to-work interference to be just under half a billion dollars a year in direct costs (approximately $1 billion per year when indirect costs are also included in the total)
• the direct costs to the health care system of treating disorders associated with high levels of family-to-work interference to be approximately $514 million per year ($215 million per year in physician visits, $247 million per year in inpatient hospital stays and $52 million per year in visits to hospital emergency department)

The findings from this research should be especially useful for employers concerned with recruiting and retaining staff, as our research found that employees with high levels of family-to-work interference reported the lowest levels of organizational commitment and job satisfaction, and the highest levels of job stress and intent to turnover of any of the respondents. Also cause for concern are data that show that employees with high levels of family-to-work interference report the lowest levels of family life satisfaction, parental satisfaction and family well-being.

Why do we need to reduce the number of Canadians reporting high levels of caregiver strain?

Approximately one in four of the individuals in this sample (26%) experience what can be considered to be high levels of caregiver strain: physical, financial or mental stress that comes from looking after an elderly dependent. Again, we can draw on the data from our previous research in this area to provide a number of sound arguments as to why organizations and governments need to identify and implement strategies to reduce caregiver strain. Compared to their counterparts with low caregiver strain, employees with high caregiver strain were:

• 13 times more likely to miss 3 or more days of work in a 6-month period due to elder care problems
• twice as likely to miss work because they were mentally, emotionally or physically fatigued, to report high levels of depressed mood, to report high levels of perceived stress, to report high levels of burnout, to have sought care from a mental health professional, to say their health is fair/poor, to have made 6 or more visits per year to a physician, to have received care on an outpatient basis, to have made 8 or more visits per year to another health care professional, to have required inpatient hospital care, to have visited a hospital emergency room, and to have spent $300 in the last year for prescription medicine for personal use

On the other hand, employees with low levels of caregiver strain were twice as likely as those with high levels of this form of conflict to report high life satisfaction.

Of particular concern are findings that show respondents with high levels of caregiver strain appear to be at the highest risk with respect to perceived stress, depressed mood and impaired physical health. They are also the least likely to be satisfied with their lives.

The financial costs of high levels of caregiver strain are also overwhelming. We estimate:

• the direct costs of absenteeism due to high levels of caregiver strain to be just over $1 billion per year (indirect costs are estimated at another $1 to $2 billion)
• the direct costs of inpatient hospital stays due to high caregiver strain to be approximately $4 billion per year, of physician visits to be approximately $1 billion per year and of visits to a hospital emergency department to be approximately $100 million per year (i.e. total cost of approximately $5 billion for these three services)
• that companies could save approximately $128 per employee per year in prescription costs alone if they could reduce caregiver strain

These costs can be expected to increase in the future as the proportion of the workforce with elder care responsibilities increases (see Higgins and Duxbury, 2002 for a discussion of this issue).

Reducing work-life conflict, regardless of the form it takes, will benefit all Canadians

These findings leave little doubt that high work-life conflict is associated with several indicators of physical and mental health problems at the employee level. Employees who are stressed, depressed and burnt out are not as productive as those in good mental health. Stress, depression and burnout are also linked to increased absenteeism, greater use of prescription medicine and employee assistance programs (EAP) and lower levels of creativity, innovation and risk taking, which, in turn, can all be expected to negatively impact an organization's bottom line and Canada's ability to be globally competitive. We have also ascertained that high work-life conflict has a negative impact on the organization's bottom line, impairs an employee's health (both physically and mentally), reduces participation in and enjoyment of family roles, negatively impacts employees' abilities to enjoy and nurture their families and increases health care costs.

If things remain as they are, the proportion of the Canadian workforce at risk with respect to work-life conflict can be expected to increase due to a number of well-documented demographic and structural changes in the family⁹ and in the nature of work¹⁰ (Barnett, 1998; Frone, 2002; Hammer et al., 2002). It is hoped that the findings from this report will help policy makers and employers put into place strategies, policies and interventions that stem the work-life conflict tide. This report should also prove useful to Canadians who wish to make lifestyle changes to restore balance to their lives.